If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

I do when I have them on hand at home, but sometimes I don't think about buying them just for that.

One time an asset protection guy questioned me about what was in my plastic bag he heard me with in the bathroom. Think he thought I was doing drugs lol.

WTF are you serious? Someone actually asked you that at work lol?

"Nah man, a Paladin has to play fair and by the rules. Do you really see Silly not attacking a weakened opponent? Or rather, not exploiting a weakness to take an enemy down? He'd totally do that. It's the law of the jungle with Silly, even if he does have faith. I think he's principled, just not merciful." - Zavon

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Don't have a home without it. Why would you use baggies instead of buying the travel size wipies with the flip tabs?

Silly never answered the question, so maybe he does both and lives dangerously every time he poops.

In this world is the destiny of mankind controlled by some transcendental entity or law? Is it like the hand of god hovering from above? Perhaps men have no control even over their own will.

You're right, we are mortal and fragile. But even if we are tortured or wounded, we'll fight to survive. You should feel the pain we feel and understand. I am the messenger that will deliver you to that pain and understanding.

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Originally Posted by Sillywilly

WTF are you serious? Someone actually asked you that at work lol?

Yeah apparently he heard me from another stall. After the stare-straight-ahead-in-silence hand washing phase transitioned to the simultaneous-cheap-paper-towels-making-the-best-of-ing hand drying phase he asked me what it was, all suspicious-but-tryna-be-casual-like.

Nowadays when people start to get killed by fireballs, no one says they need to dodge the fireball anymore; they say they need to go get a fire resist ring and some ice damage so they don't have to.

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

To quote KiA, "Last week the media was telling us ANTIFA were heroes akin to WW2 soldiers and American revolutionaries. Now the MSM is saying they're dangerous, radical domestic terrorists and privileged shitlords. Did a check bounce? Did the CEO of MSNBC get hit in the head with a commie pipe wrench?"

I appears the MSM is turning against Antifa, probably as strategists worry about the long term damage being done to their agenda by supporting and condoning a group advocating violent communist revolution in the US. Tech companies have already started the purge of videos of Antifa being violent on Facebook and YouTube, but it's too little too late. As the jaws of the censorship machine lock into place it will be interesting to see how things develop going forward. Only citizen journalism has prevented our descent into complete dystopia these past several years.

If the primary avenues of communication are locked down, what does the future look like? Will more decentralized platforms like Bitchute/Gab, etc. take off in a big way, or will they remain sparsely populated offshoots harboring malcontents like Voat?

"The argument that “people now have more freedom than ever” is based on the fact that we are allowed to do almost anything we please as long as it has no practical consequences."

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Originally Posted by Marou

If the primary avenues of communication are locked down, what does the future look like? Will more decentralized platforms like Bitchute/Gab, etc. take off in a big way, or will they remain sparsely populated offshoots harboring malcontents like Voat?

We're fucked. I've been predicting this IRL for years. Polarizing of the internet with left- and right-leaning versions of hosting sites is going to go down exactly like the media polarization went last time. People online will do the same thing people watching T.V. did. They'll sit there in their own area belief-confirming. Once that's fully established we will nolonger be debating anything, on any level, anywhere in the U.S. where it will do any good. It's taking longer than I thought it would, but it's happening.

Nowadays when people start to get killed by fireballs, no one says they need to dodge the fireball anymore; they say they need to go get a fire resist ring and some ice damage so they don't have to.

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Originally Posted by VKhaun

We're fucked. I've been predicting this IRL for years. Polarizing of the internet with left- and right-leaning versions of hosting sites is going to go down exactly like the media polarization went last time. People online will do the same thing people watching T.V. did. They'll sit there in their own area belief-confirming. Once that's fully established we will nolonger be debating anything, on any level, anywhere in the U.S. where it will do any good. It's taking longer than I thought it would, but it's happening.

That's sort of happened already, because many people these days are too intellectually fragile to engage in any sort of debate with people that may disagree with them. Facebook is really the epitome of the internet echo chamber. The thing is though, I don't see it segregating quite the same way you do. I see the corporate internet (which includes the totalitarian "Progressives") on one side, and classical liberals + everyone else with non mainstream political opinions on the other. So, rather than it being left + right it's mainstream (censored) vs alternative (uncensored).

By default that uncensored area will be largely right wing, but that's merely a byproduct of snowflakes treating dissent as physical violence. Classical liberals and other people are more than welcome to (and do) use alternative platforms. They may not be in the majority in those places, but discussions do occur across ideological lines. In the corporate areas it's going to be a mono-culture, but there will be (and is) diversity of thought and opinion in the alternative. I find this incredibly ironic.

"The argument that “people now have more freedom than ever” is based on the fact that we are allowed to do almost anything we please as long as it has no practical consequences."

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Changing the context a bit but this on Voat caught my interest because it brought back a memory I had forgotten.

Ever heard someone test your front door to see if it was open?

When I was around 16, a black man rang the door bell. I looked out the peephole but I couldn't see anything. Now the front door had two very large windows next to it but for whatever reason, whether by design or the way the sun hits the house, you can never see inside unless you smash your face up to the windows, though you can clearly see out. I could see that he had shifted to the side of the peephole, was covering it with his thumb and had his other arm purposefully hidden behind his back. I had never been so god damn terrified in my life. He eventually went away and I can't recall whether he tried the door knob, how long he was there and how many times he rang the door bell. I can't believe I forgot that happened.

Something similar happened when I was around 9 or 10 and a group of black boys started banging on the front door. I was home alone cause both my parents worked and there was an hour after school let out and when one of them would get off work. I think both of those instances have ingrained in me to never answer the door if you don't know the person on the other side, regardless the color of their skin.

Besides for sharing a story, maybe the opinion/question part is do you answer the door if you don't know the person?

In this world is the destiny of mankind controlled by some transcendental entity or law? Is it like the hand of god hovering from above? Perhaps men have no control even over their own will.

You're right, we are mortal and fragile. But even if we are tortured or wounded, we'll fight to survive. You should feel the pain we feel and understand. I am the messenger that will deliver you to that pain and understanding.

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Changing the context a bit but this on Voat caught my interest because it brought back a memory I had forgotten.

Ever heard someone test your front door to see if it was open?

When I was around 16, a black man rang the door bell. I looked out the peephole but I couldn't see anything. Now the front door had two very large windows next to it but for whatever reason, whether by design or the way the sun hits the house, you can never see inside unless you smash your face up to the windows, though you can clearly see out. I could see that he had shifted to the side of the peephole, was covering it with his thumb and had his other arm purposefully hidden behind his back. I had never been so god damn terrified in my life. He eventually went away and I can't recall whether he tried the door knob, how long he was there and how many times he rang the door bell. I can't believe I forgot that happened.

Something similar happened when I was around 9 or 10 and a group of black boys started banging on the front door. I was home alone cause both my parents worked and there was an hour after school let out and when one of them would get off work. I think both of those instances have ingrained in me to never answer the door if you don't know the person on the other side, regardless the color of their skin.

Besides for sharing a story, maybe the opinion/question part is do you answer the door if you don't know the person?

I've essentially live 85% of my life in a rural town of *googled and it's actually only ~500 strong as of 2010* people that explodes to around 5-10,000 in the summer season for the whole tourist region(multiple towns). So I've never really had any fears like this ingrained in me. I am generally cautious when visiting bigger cities but that doesn't happen very often. In short, yes, but at the same time no because I'm so anti-social I may just pretend I'm not home. At the same time my father, mother, and brother -in laws all live about 1,000 feet away.

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Changing the context a bit but this on Voat caught my interest because it brought back a memory I had forgotten.

Ever heard someone test your front door to see if it was open?

When I was around 16, a black man rang the door bell. I looked out the peephole but I couldn't see anything. Now the front door had two very large windows next to it but for whatever reason, whether by design or the way the sun hits the house, you can never see inside unless you smash your face up to the windows, though you can clearly see out. I could see that he had shifted to the side of the peephole, was covering it with his thumb and had his other arm purposefully hidden behind his back. I had never been so god damn terrified in my life. He eventually went away and I can't recall whether he tried the door knob, how long he was there and how many times he rang the door bell. I can't believe I forgot that happened.

Something similar happened when I was around 9 or 10 and a group of black boys started banging on the front door. I was home alone cause both my parents worked and there was an hour after school let out and when one of them would get off work. I think both of those instances have ingrained in me to never answer the door if you don't know the person on the other side, regardless the color of their skin.

Besides for sharing a story, maybe the opinion/question part is do you answer the door if you don't know the person?

I don't know if you guys call it the same thing, but where I grew up we used to call this "Nigger Knockin". It's such a common nigger tactic to try to gain entry into someone's home. As kids we used to even play it as a game. We'd dare someone to go Nigger Knock a neighbor, buy ringing the doorbell or banging loudly then trying to hide.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." ~ Voltaire

"I do think that most atheists are fat out of shape faggots that would be ok with other men shagging their women. The few that can actually get a woman. General failures at life in every regard. " Zavon

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Originally Posted by Zavon

I don't know if you guys call it the same thing, but where I grew up we used to call this "Nigger Knockin". It's such a common nigger tactic to try to gain entry into someone's home. As kids we used to even play it as a game. We'd dare someone to go Nigger Knock a neighbor, buy ringing the doorbell or banging loudly then trying to hide.

LOL yep. And both of my grandpas used to have clubs with a really thick end on it that was called a "nigger knocker" hanging right by the door so you could club them over the head when they tried to rush you.

"Nah man, a Paladin has to play fair and by the rules. Do you really see Silly not attacking a weakened opponent? Or rather, not exploiting a weakness to take an enemy down? He'd totally do that. It's the law of the jungle with Silly, even if he does have faith. I think he's principled, just not merciful." - Zavon

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Bolshevism
By HP Lovecraft
1919

The most alarming tendency observable in this age is a growing disregard for the established forces of law and order. Whether or not stimulated by the noxious example of the almost sub-human Russian rabble, the less intelligent element throughout the world seems animated by a singular viciousness, and exhibits symptoms like those of a herd on the verge of stampeding. Whilst longwinded politicians preach universal peace, long-haired anarchists are preaching a social upheaval which means nothing more or less than a reversion to savagery or mediaeval barbarism.

Even in this traditionally orderly nation the number of Bolsheviki, both open and veiled, is considerable enough to require remedial measures. The repeated and unreasonable strikes of important workers, seemingly with the object of indiscriminate extortion rather than rational wage increase, constitute a menace which should be checked. To a certain extent, our government will probably meet these conditions with legislation affecting seditious speech and treasonable acts; but if a permanent cure is to be accomplished, something deeper and more educational will be needed. It will require propaganda to combat propaganda. The present agitation undoubtedly arises from false belief in the possibility of a radically altered social order. The workers who strike, and the shouters who incite to crime, are obviously possessed of the notion that the property of the wealthy could practicably be shared with them; that even if they were to seize the things they covet, they could continue the enjoyment of civilised existence and of protection against violence.

We need a new Menenius Agrippa to proclaim and demonstrate widely the total fallacy of such an illusion. Our present social order, whilst capable of some degree of liberalisation, is the product of the natural development of human relations. It is not ideal, nor could anything on earth be ideal—but it is inevitable. Just as long as some men are more intelligent than others, so long will there be inequality of wealth. The type of persons who indulge in strikes and socialism seem never to realise how much they depend on the brains of their hated “economic masters”. They do not reflect that if they were to seize the factories and governments as they desire, they would be totally powerless to run them. The lawless I. W. W. sometimes boasts of its prospective ability to overthrow orderly government and substitute a sanguinary reign of the so-called “proletariat”.

Perhaps such a catastrophe will come, just as the Russian catastrophe came; but how little will the blind anarchists gain therefrom! With the intelligent element removed, the rabble will use up the resources of civilisation without being able to produce more; cities and public works will fall into decay, and a new barbarism arise, out of which will spring in time the natural chieftains who will constitute the “masters” of another era of capitalism. Far better that the impressionable and inflammable masses be taught these things before they embark upon a futile revolution which will ruin all civilisation, themselves included, without helping anyone.

--------------------------------------------------------

I had never read this, saw on voat. Verified, figured you guys would find it interesting.

"The argument that “people now have more freedom than ever” is based on the fact that we are allowed to do almost anything we please as long as it has no practical consequences."

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Originally Posted by Marou

Bolshevism
By HP Lovecraft
1919

The most alarming tendency observable in this age is a growing disregard for the established forces of law and order. Whether or not stimulated by the noxious example of the almost sub-human Russian rabble, the less intelligent element throughout the world seems animated by a singular viciousness, and exhibits symptoms like those of a herd on the verge of stampeding. Whilst longwinded politicians preach universal peace, long-haired anarchists are preaching a social upheaval which means nothing more or less than a reversion to savagery or mediaeval barbarism.

Even in this traditionally orderly nation the number of Bolsheviki, both open and veiled, is considerable enough to require remedial measures. The repeated and unreasonable strikes of important workers, seemingly with the object of indiscriminate extortion rather than rational wage increase, constitute a menace which should be checked. To a certain extent, our government will probably meet these conditions with legislation affecting seditious speech and treasonable acts; but if a permanent cure is to be accomplished, something deeper and more educational will be needed. It will require propaganda to combat propaganda. The present agitation undoubtedly arises from false belief in the possibility of a radically altered social order. The workers who strike, and the shouters who incite to crime, are obviously possessed of the notion that the property of the wealthy could practicably be shared with them; that even if they were to seize the things they covet, they could continue the enjoyment of civilised existence and of protection against violence.

We need a new Menenius Agrippa to proclaim and demonstrate widely the total fallacy of such an illusion. Our present social order, whilst capable of some degree of liberalisation, is the product of the natural development of human relations. It is not ideal, nor could anything on earth be ideal—but it is inevitable. Just as long as some men are more intelligent than others, so long will there be inequality of wealth. The type of persons who indulge in strikes and socialism seem never to realise how much they depend on the brains of their hated “economic masters”. They do not reflect that if they were to seize the factories and governments as they desire, they would be totally powerless to run them. The lawless I. W. W. sometimes boasts of its prospective ability to overthrow orderly government and substitute a sanguinary reign of the so-called “proletariat”.

Perhaps such a catastrophe will come, just as the Russian catastrophe came; but how little will the blind anarchists gain therefrom! With the intelligent element removed, the rabble will use up the resources of civilisation without being able to produce more; cities and public works will fall into decay, and a new barbarism arise, out of which will spring in time the natural chieftains who will constitute the “masters” of another era of capitalism. Far better that the impressionable and inflammable masses be taught these things before they embark upon a futile revolution which will ruin all civilisation, themselves included, without helping anyone.

--------------------------------------------------------

I had never read this, saw on voat. Verified, figured you guys would find it interesting.

More brilliance from a brilliant man. Modern day /pol/ memes are exactly that, propaganda to fight propaganda, and they are working. We got a Trump president.

"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one." ~ Voltaire

"I do think that most atheists are fat out of shape faggots that would be ok with other men shagging their women. The few that can actually get a woman. General failures at life in every regard. " Zavon

Re: Let's give an opinion thread

Sargon of Akkad started going down that stupid path of saying he doesn't care if there are any white people in the future, saying "white genocide" is a stupid concept, and attacking the alt-right. A very insightful comment came from an unexpected corner, I've watched some of her videos in the past so was familiar with the name.

We have a culture in the west where every group is allowed to play identity politics based on innate characteristics, except for the following: straights, cisgenders, males and whites.

We also have a culture in the west where every group but the above is protected by legislation, and where institutional discrimination is legally permissible against the above categories.

We ALSO have a cultural narrative that has been institutionalized in academia, law, politics, news media, social work, education and popular culture that describes the above-named groups as 1) responsible for creating a system that oppresses all other groups; 2) complicit in this oppression not by participation in the system, but by virtue of simply being who they are and therefore benefiting unjustly from said system; 3) uniquely monstrous in historical terms (colonialism, exploitation, slavery, etc); 4) enjoying "unearned privilege" over other groups; 5) uniquely capable of inflicting harm, even when harm is not intended; and 6) in control of everything.

More than this, group slander against these groups, and even incitement to violence against them ("all men are pigs", "men are scum", "violence has a male face", #KillAllWhiteMen, #All I want for Christmas is White Genocide, etc) is seen as socially and legally permissible. The public discourse actively stirs up animosity and resentment against these particular groups, and promotes narratives that these groups are victimizers and that fear of them based on their biological characteristics alone is justified (m&ms anyone? How about white on black racism and police shootings?).

The demonization narrative and the legal dehumanizing slander are cultural conditions that precede actual genocides. It doesn't matter if any of it is true. All that matters is that enough people believe it's true and that it is considered legally and socially acceptable to demonize and dehumanize the target group.

I doubt straights, cisgenders and males (as a distinct, homogeneous category) are in danger here. Straights and cisgenders will never be a minority. The vast majority of males in a normal society will always have women in their lives who cannot be convinced to lump their own husbands, brothers, fathers, sons, etc, into a group slated for extermination. You just won't be able to convince the average woman to hate ALL men enough to put her OWN men in an oven.

But whites? None of the above applies to whites. What happens if whites become a minority in their own societies if the demonization narrative and the legalized dehumanizing slander of whites is still seen as socially permissible? If the culture of racial resentment against whites and the narrative of whites being responsible for all the evils of history is still legally permissible? What if this false history that whites are uniquely monstrous and that all other groups are their victims is still taught in schools? What if it is still taught that no matter what a white person does, they can't avoid victimizing other groups because even if they don't participate in the system of white privilege and whites' oppression of everyone else, they still benefit from it and there's nothing they can do to avoid benefiting from it?

The institutionalized narratives paint whites into a corner they can't escape. Even innocence is no defense for the individual, because they are culpable simply by existing within a system of "white supremacy" that benefits them whether they want to benefit or not.

Anti-white sentiment is socially and legally allowed. Inciting hatred, resentment and even violence against whites is also allowed in ways it is forbidden against minorities.

And then we have Standpoint Theory and Epistemic Privilege. Under this set of theories (taught in all the places you'd expect) the oppressed have the status of "people who should be listened to". The theory describes all relationships as "master/slave", and the slave has epistemic privilege. They are presumed to understand their own and their master's experiences, motivations, intentions, thoughts and beliefs better than their master understands either.

The problem is that the people who subscribe to these theories have assigned master and slave status based on something that can't be changed (skin color, gender, etc), when in reality power DOES change hands. What is to stop those who have been assigned epistemic privilege today from defending their epistemic privilege even when they find themselves in the position of master rather than slave?

"I'm oppressed. How do I know? Well, I'm black, therefore oppressed, therefore I have epistemic privilege. This gives me a unique insight into how things work, and using my unique insight that my status as an oppressed person gives me, I can guarantee you I'm still oppressed. Well, of course you don't believe me. You're white. You're only saying that because you want to hold onto your privilege. I know this, because my epistemic privilege puts me in a position to understand your motivations better than you do. And believe me, if I were no longer oppressed, I'd let you know. But I can assure you I am still oppressed and you are still privileged (and privilege is invisible to the person who has it, mind you), and you have to believe me because I have epistemic privilege."

Don't get me wrong, Carl. I couldn't care less about keeping the "white race" pure. But I've been thinking about all these things, and I'm seriously concerned about what is going to happen if whites ever do find themselves to be a minority in their own countries. If someone wanted to actually orchestrate a genocide, they couldn't do much better than promoting these narratives of collective white original sin, making white-bashing and overt resentment and animosity toward whites socially acceptable (even admirable) and then arranging for whites to be displaced in their own countries by other races.

If I wanted an actual white genocide to happen, it's what I'd do.﻿

Her insightful commentary in fact described exactly how things played out first in Rhodesia, currently in South Africa, and without major change; will play out within the next few decades in America and Europe.

She posted another comment in responses to one of the responses to her.

Originally Posted by Karen Straughan

"Now sure, we could very well fail in upholding universal individual rights, on their own platform, but I would still prefer to aim for that on its own merits and lose than to ever advocate white identarianism and hope that that will stop at just equal protections under the law that other race advocacy groups have achieved, because those minority group activists sure haven't."

Do you have kids? Because I would rather my white kids live in a white identitarian society than have them be murdered in the society that may come about when all races but whites are allowed to be racist and identitarian and where whites are collectively blamed for everything evil.

That is, what if there IS no third option (individual rights)? What if the two choices are a culture where whites are a privileged majority but minorities are protected, or where whites are a hated minority without protection?

If I had no skin in the game, I'd be going for the third option, too. But I do have skin in the game. I have three kids who will (hopefully) outlive me. They all are pale and fair haired with blue eyes.

A lot of people will claim I'm being overly dramatic, but most people have no clue whatsoever as to how evolved human beings are not. My own uncle, at dinner the other night, told me there was "something seriously wrong" with me when I said the nazis who guarded the death camps were mostly just regular people who wrote letters home to their wives saying they missed them and loved them, treated their pets well and reminded their kids to do their homework and be good to their moms. That otherwise normal, reasonable people can be convinced to do unspeakable things when the entire culture is telling them they've been and are being victimized and are only defending themselves, and that they have the moral high ground.

I would honestly rather be on the winning side than sacrifice my kids to some "third option" illusion of human beings as sane, rational, evolved beings.

Do I want the third option? YES. But if a race war is what I'm going to have to deal with, whether I want it or not, I'll pick the side that corresponds with my kids' skin color in a fucking heartbeat.

Sucks to think that you might be one of those people who, fifty years down the road, are cited as the ones who tried to warn people away from disaster and were ignored.﻿

"The argument that “people now have more freedom than ever” is based on the fact that we are allowed to do almost anything we please as long as it has no practical consequences."